In a statement, ASIC said it had initiated the legal action against liquidated group DOD Bookkeeping, formerly known as Equiti Financial Services (Equiti FS).
Equiti FS was part of the Equiti Group of companies that offered SMSF establishment and administration services, real estate and mortgage broking services.
“ASIC alleges that, between 26 October 2015 to 27 August 2018, Equiti FS paid three advisers bonuses totalling $164,750 upon settlement of property purchases those advisers recommended their clients make through either an existing SMSF or an SMSF to be established,” the regulator said.
“The bonuses applied to purchases arranged by Equiti Property.
“ASIC alleges that these bonus payments breached the ban on conflicted remuneration under the Corporations Act 2001 because they could reasonably be expected to influence the financial product advice provided, or the choice of financial product recommended, by Equiti FS advisers to retail clients.”
ASIC also alleged advisers employed by the group gave advice to 12 clients between 2015 and 2018 that was not in their best interests.
“Each advice contained a recommendation to establish an SMSF, purchase a property through the SMSF and borrow funds in order to do so,” the regulator said.
ASIC is seeking civil penalties and other orders against Equiti FS.
Could we change a few words hear and get a different result – lets see..
“ASIC alleges that, between 26 October 2015 to 27 August 2018, (Equiti FS replace with – Industry Super) paid three advisers bonuses totalling $164,750 upon settlement of (property purchases replace with Superannuation Contributions/Rollover) those advisers recommended their clients make through either an (existing SMSF or an SMSF to be established – replace with existing Account or establish a new one),” the regulator said.
“ASIC alleges that these bonus payments breached the ban on conflicted remuneration under the Corporations Act 2001 because they could reasonably be expected to influence the financial product advice provided, or the choice of financial product recommended, by (Equiti FS – replace with Industry Super) advisers to retail clients.”
Hard to tell.
What a stupid ill-formed comment. You may not be aware of this well known fact, but industry planners still to have to follow best interests duties too.
We have an APL as well, & don’t necessarily recommend the fund that we work for, & quite often we will recommend external funds. We have our internal audit, external audit, & also ASIC audits as well, & unlike retail advisers, we don’t receive bonus or commissions, so we don’t have any conflicted interests.
Instead of spewing out hatred, how about you realise that we are all doing the same job, but we are just under a different AFSL.
Union super licensed advisers may be subject to the same regulations as other licensed advisers, but union super sales reps and call centre operators do not. And they’re the primary advice providers for union funds. You are just a token regulated employee.
Nothing like showing up after the battle has been lost & then shooting the wounded….that’s ASIC for you….
How does ASIC apply conflicted remuneration standard during a period of when no such standard was in place other than for it to disclose to the client
More legal fee costs for advisers who havent collapsed a company…
And so it begins…
Terrific work ASIC on dealing with pond scum like this. Now if you could only go after corporations their directors for getting people to invest in schemes that YOU ASIC rubber stamped. You remeber, Great SOuthern, Timbercorp Banksia Group, Prime Property Trust, Trio capital…..cost versus benefit you say. What a sick joke the regulator ASIC is….I guess kickbacks to senior staff at ASIC wasn’t possible with this group and besides they are after all low hanging fruit.
Another Hanna special- even Willy mason fell for the wealth bs